[CS-FSLUG] A Grand Pipe-dream Proposal

[Bradly McConnell]

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 20:01:30 -0600 (CST), Ed Hurst <ehurst at asisaid.com> wrote:
> Brothers and Sisters!
> 
> You may be aware that at least one of our list members is a
> console-only user. Despite the difficulty, he's been getting along just
> fine. However, he is working at a from a power-user position. Is it
> possible to create a Linux that fairly ordinary users could adopt that
> has no GUI? How about just an advanced framebuffer?
> 
> There are some important applications missing, primarily a console word
> processor. How often have I heard that lamented in my 8 years using
> Linux/BSD? How did we get short-changed on that? Some applications
> claiming to be for the console are actually for Xterm and friends, and
> won't work properly without X.
> 
> This is not about a hostility toward X, just a desire to provide a
> console version that works consistently. You can call it a new distro
> if you like, but the aim is take what's available, modify it and add
> some things missing until we get a genuine user distro for the console.
> 
> As a motive, consider all the Christian users around the world who
> can't afford the latest and greatest hardware, but use 486s and such.
> Are they doomed to a world of DOS/Windoze, or the current massive
> learning curve to catch up with our power users? How about a distro
> that will embrace the 3rd world! :-)
> 
> Enough hype and sales talk. If anyone is interested in working on this,
> our greatest shortfall right now is genunine coders to add the missing
> apps, and someone with enough skill to remaster something like Knoppix
> for the console. It would be really great if someone could help us
> construct a "TUI" -- text user interface. I'm certain there are lots of
> projects just a step or two away from what we need.
> 
> If nothing else, pray for me. I'm willing to raise money for hosting so
> this project has a chance. If this thing dies at the starting gate, I'm
> willing to wear the egg on my face. I'll play the front man plus write
> the documentation.
> 
> Ed Hurst

What about using VI or EMACS as the "word processor"?  At least you
won't have to deal with MS Office or OpenOffice methods of
autoformatting the text to what "it" thinks it should be, and not what
"you" want it to be.

Brad